Budget-minded Time Warner customers can now take advantage of the new option.

Looking to save a few bucks on your broadband bill? If you live in some Texas cities, Time Warner Cable has a plan for you. In a blog post earlier this week, the cable ISP announced plans to bring back usage-based pricing—but only if you want to cap yourself. TWC's new "Essentials" plan will knock $5 off your monthly bill as long as you keep your usage below 5GB.

TWC will provide you with a meter so you can track your usage up to the minute. They'll charge you $1 per GB when you go over the limit, and give you a 60-day grace period so you can tweak your usage patterns to your new capped reality. You can opt out at any time if you decide you like your broadband unlimited after all.

Time Warner famously experimented with bandwidth caps back in 2008. New subscribers in Beaumont, Texas were capped at a max of 40GB per month, and paid $55 for the privilege—along with a $1 per GB overage fee. Budget-minded subscribers were charged $29.95 for a 5GB cap.

The company was hit with a barrage of criticism over the usage-based billing trial, which was seen as a cheap attempt to reduce consumer demand and avoid making needed investments in cable infrastructure—like upgrading its network to DOCSIS 3.0. Critics also pointed out that the caps would discourage subscribers from using services like Netflix which, to an extent, competes with the company's television offerings. Less than a year later, the trials were over, and the good citizens of Beaumont could resume gorging themselves at the broadband buffet.

TWC learned from the 2008 debacle, as the company readily admits. "Yes, we did try this before, a few years ago," wrote TWC director of communications Jeff Simmermon. "And yes, pretty much everyone agrees that it didn’t go so well. So we listened to customer complaints. A lot."

The biggest change is that customers don't have to opt-in to usage-based billing if they don't want to. It's targeted purely at budget-conscious light users who are looking to save a few bucks. A "Lite" (up to 768Kbps down) subscriber in San Antonio can shave her bill from $19.99 to $14.99 per month. Standard (10Mbps) tier pricing would go from $29.99 to $24.99. Overall, TWC's pricing is much more reasonable this time around.

Still, 5GB is not very much Internet. And TWC's setup prices "normal" Internet use at 10GB per month, which seems absurdly low to us. Unless you don't do much other than e-mail and light browsing, you'll likely find yourself hitting the cap quickly and paying full price anyway. Simmernon acknowledges this, saying that the plan is targeted towards "those who want to save few dollars on Web capacity" they are "never going to need."

For now, TWC appears to be alone among major US wireline ISPs in embracing usage-based billing. The largest ISP in the US, Comcast, is happy to keep subscribers capped at 250GB per month and avoid tiered pricing. "We have a very high customer satisfaction rating and we don't really want to rock the boat on that product," Comcast chief financial officer Michael Angelakis said earlier this week at a conference in San Francisco, according to Multichannel News. "I give [TWC] credit for trying different things. We have real momentum in that business and the goal is to keep it."

Only five bucks less to keep my usage under 5 GB? That's a tiny incentive for a massive limitation. That's a cap that can be overrun by moderate netflix usage.

It's like a car dealer you fifty dollars off the sticker price for a car that's missing a wheel.

Or 1-2 steam downloads for mainstream games, even.

Absolutely. Thing is, video games are still considered a geeky hobby, in spite the fact that everyone plays them. It's an antiquated stereotype, but it's there.

Netflix (and Hulu, and Itunes video, etc) is increasingly common and only getting moreso. There are many people who don't know what Steam is, who wouldn't know what to do with an ISO, but are netflix junkies. You want to talk to a non-technical audience about the effects of bandwidth caps, you hit'em in the netflix.

I don't see a problem with metered use. I see more of a problem with these "plans." Why should you pay for what you "plan" to use, if you don't? You don't get billed that way for electricity, oil, gas, water. The "plan" is a way to get people to pay extra, above and beyond what they actually need, by threatening them with out-of-scale overage charges. It's true for cellular minutes, of course they want to apply the same profit scheme to other types of data. Data should be treated like a utility. It is similar in many other ways, especially including the high cost of entry into the market and limited competition, factors which tend to encourage unfair pricing.

I bought a game on Steam the other day and that alone was more than 5 gigs.

5 gig cap is bullshit, only saving $5/month by severely limiting your internet usage is bullshit, and $1/gig overage is bullshit. why would anyone sign up for this?

edit: 5 gigs is 5-6 hours of Netflix/Hulu .... if you set it to low quality so it only uses 2Mbps. I lived in a place with 2Mbps internet, and that is like youtube quality with blockiness and frequent buffering.

I can see this being useful for those who still use dialup (and there are still some out there). Price is the prime motivating factor for them, and the new pricing is pretty much in dial-up territory. That is good for those people. Unfortunately most people start doing more things once they have more bandwidth. Things like Hulu or Netflix that were possible before suddenly become a lot more usable, and usage goes up tremendously.

Seriously, why don't they do the common sense thing and act like a utility: charge me for the connectivity (say $15/month) and then meter my usage. And offer peak and off-peak pricing that is sane (I'd say $.25/GB peak, $.10/GB off-peak) and then we can talk. Then we don't mind the customer pillaging that arises from government set monopolies, and they have to act like the electric company does (that's what they wanted with usage billing, right?).

I don't see a problem with metered use. I see more of a problem with these "plans." Why should you pay for what you "plan" to use, if you don't? You don't get billed that way for electricity, oil, gas, water. The "plan" is a way to get people to pay extra, above and beyond what they actually need, by threatening them with out-of-scale overage charges. It's true for cellular minutes, of course they want to apply the same profit scheme to other types of data. Data should be treated like a utility. It is similar in many other ways, especially including the high cost of entry into the market and limited competition, factors which tend to encourage unfair pricing.

Last month the fixed portion of my gas & electric bill was three times the marginal portion.

Get a grip guys. Obviously this plan isn't aimed at you. I know this may come as a complete shock to your ego, but not everyone thinks and acts like you do. I know. It's shocking to think that not everyone downloads ISO's, Netflix or uses Steam. Even more mind blowing is not everyone has a smartphone. And get this guys, some people don't even use facebook. It's truly fucking mind blowing isn't it.

/sarcasm.

That extra $5 a month is $60 a year. Would you give $60 to a stranger for a service you've not used.

Not everyone is a bandwidth hog. Lucky for you guys, who effectively get your broadband subsidized by the majority of BB subscribers.

Metered billing means if you don't use any data, you don't pay any money. It's time the government stepped in and declared tiered plans like this illegal unless the ISP's are willing to be regulated like utilities by an authorized body. That means the inclusion of a standards based meter that's annually certified for accuracy and a government regulated pricing structure per KB/MB/GB all paid for by the ISP. That's metered billing. Just like power, just like water.

Metered billing means if you don't use any data, you don't pay any money. It's time the government stepped in and declared tiered plans like this illegal unless the ISP's are willing to be regulated like utilities by an authorized body. That means the inclusion of a standards based meter that's annually certified for accuracy and a government regulated pricing structure per KB/MB/GB all paid for by the ISP. That's metered billing. Just like power, just like water.

Biggest potential problem is that unlike the latter two, data goes both ways.

Should upstream be exempt, as there is someone else paying for the downstream at the other end, or will we see a case of both ends paying as observed with calls and texts?

Not for me and I have no problem with this in theory. But in practice I see this as TWC's 2nd attempt to get their foot in the door on caps and trying to eventually force a cap on all of their customers. I just hope someone at TWC understands that they only reason some people like me have stuck with their cable TV service is because of their cable TV/internet bundles. Cap my internet and lose me as a customer.

Total bandwidth used is a terrible metric for network control. If you're using bandwidth during off-peak hours, you are costing the network provider nothing.

There are plenty of reasonable models for usage-based billing, but no major ISP has ever even vetted them. There's no on-peak/off-peak usage differentials. They do not disclose how much it costs them to transfer a gigabyte (pennies). Bandwidth caps are thinly-veiled anti-competitive measures against video streaming services like Netflix and Hulu.

Company brings them a goat, and charges them all kinds of fees to use and maintain it.

Customer says "bring me a rock."

Company brings them a huge boulder, and charges them a storage fee for dumping it on their lawn.

Customer says "bring me a rock."

Company brings them small pebbles, but instead of charging them per-pebble for the pebbles they want to use, they force the customer to pay for a minimum of 10 gajillion pebbles, then charging them for overages if they go over a stated pebble amount.

Customer says "bring me a rock."

Company doesn't bring a rock. Instead, they find ways to add more hurdles making it harder for the customer to go about their business.

I'm fine with TW offering this plan, but it's not the right solution. Usage should not be limited by a download cap, it should be limited by speed BY TIME OF DAY. Off-peak hour downloading should not count at all towards any sort of cap. This is the type of market force that would encourage people to do their downloading at night.

For me, I watch several online shows (all legal btw). I could download them at night and watch them when I'm ready. But instead I just stream them when I'm ready to watch. Downloading them requires the additional effort of file management, but with the right incentive I just might do it! This is what would unclog the pipelines.

I can see this being useful for those who still use dialup (and there are still some out there). Price is the prime motivating factor for them, and the new pricing is pretty much in dial-up territory. That is good for those people.

You are also required to subscribe to a Time Warner Cable package to receive this pricing. This will not be very enticing for those that price is the motivating factor.

As long as they keep it optional, I see no problem. This, for instance, would be great for my grandmother who doesn't even allow the OS updates for fear that it will break something. I once tracked her usage for a month, it was tiny. That being said, 5GB is probably a lot less than most normal customers think ("hey that's like a gazillion songs".... forgetting Netflix and HD youtube, and the like), however, but if you believe TWC's blog post, there is a 2 month grace period and no penalty to switch back. Honestly, this seem's like a fine idea... I won't be using it of course, but it's easily the best implementation I've seen.

Ya, I know all corporate income is approximately fungible, so this will ultimately raise prices on unlimited plans (unless this encourages people to step up to higher speeds and actually encourages more infrastructure growth). But I don't see why I need my plan subsidized, and hopefully TWC is smart enough to just spread increases over a period of time by reducing the otherwise inevitable price drops as infrastructure (hopefully) improves.

EDIT: I do love how in their example of the "hourly meter" program, they show 8GB being used in one day while the top tier is 5GB and $1 per GB after that.

Metered billing means if you don't use any data, you don't pay any money. It's time the government stepped in and declared tiered plans like this illegal unless the ISP's are willing to be regulated like utilities by an authorized body. That means the inclusion of a standards based meter that's annually certified for accuracy and a government regulated pricing structure per KB/MB/GB all paid for by the ISP. That's metered billing. Just like power, just like water.

Biggest potential problem is that unlike the latter two, data goes both ways.

Should upstream be exempt, as there is someone else paying for the downstream at the other end, or will we see a case of both ends paying as observed with calls and texts?

The cable and telco gys want that when they complain about Neflix using up their bandwidth and wanting to have Netflix pay them for that. I mean, I always though that was what peering agreements are for, but I'm an idiot when it comes to understanding telco logic.

Ya, I know all corporate income is approximately fungible, so this will ultimately raise prices on unlimited plans (unless this encourages people to step up to higher speeds and actually encourages more infrastructure growth). But I don't see why I need my plan subsidized, and hopefully TWC is smart enough to just spread increases over a period of time by reducing the otherwise inevitable price drops as infrastructure (hopefully) improves.

EDIT: I do love how in their example of the "hourly meter" program, they show 8GB being used in one day while the top tier is 5GB and $1 per GB after that.

Wait, you expect prices to go down as costs go down (you said they were inevitable)? When in the last ten years have they lowered prices? Because their costs HAVE gone down as they have higher market penetration and cheaper equipment. And yet costs have gone up consistently. There is no logic, no market forces, and nobody willing and able to stand up to the ISPs about this. You vote their way and you are set for life.

They've learned from their mistakes alright, but not the mistakes we wish they had learned. They are determined to push data-capped plans and they've simply learned to adopt a different tactic. I got a brochure the other day of their current rates, and their "standard" speed is 55 or 60 bucks. That's just nuts. It looks to me like they've started off by jacking up the rates to insane levels, then dangling the carrot of savings (trivial they may be) for bandwidth caps.

Get a grip guys. Obviously this plan isn't aimed at you. I know this may come as a complete shock to your ego, but not everyone thinks and acts like you do. I know. It's shocking to think that not everyone downloads ISO's, Netflix or uses Steam. Even more mind blowing is not everyone has a smartphone. And get this guys, some people don't even use facebook. It's truly fucking mind blowing isn't it.

/sarcasm.

That extra $5 a month is $60 a year. Would you give $60 to a stranger for a service you've not used.

Not everyone is a bandwidth hog. Lucky for you guys, who effectively get your broadband subsidized by the majority of BB subscribers.

Even non-PC gamers/heavy users might purchase a game or movie through XBox Live. They're going to be really pissed when their $20 game cost them an additional $10-20 in bandwidth charges.

Get a grip guys. Obviously this plan isn't aimed at you. I know this may come as a complete shock to your ego, but not everyone thinks and acts like you do. I know. It's shocking to think that not everyone downloads ISO's, Netflix or uses Steam. Even more mind blowing is not everyone has a smartphone. And get this guys, some people don't even use facebook. It's truly fucking mind blowing isn't it.

/sarcasm.

That extra $5 a month is $60 a year. Would you give $60 to a stranger for a service you've not used.

Not everyone is a bandwidth hog. Lucky for you guys, who effectively get your broadband subsidized by the majority of BB subscribers.

Nice false dichotomy. While the people you are responding to are pointing out they personally would blow through this limit in a fraction of a day, anyone using the internet for more than email (and some of those would blow through it if they have friends who send them videos), has a fair chance of passing 5GB in a month,

This cap is plainly calculated to result in overage fees, not provide a useful means of reducing your ISP bills.